Re: Clean Object Class Design -- Circle/Ellipse
Date: Sun, 30 Sep 2001 01:06:35 -0400
Message-ID: <rLxt7.1502$dC2.105284655_at_radon.golden.net>
"Richard MacDonald" <macdonaldrj_at_att.net> wrote in message
news:H5%r7.8058$WW.786561_at_bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> "Bob Badour" <bbadour_at_golden.net> wrote in message
> news:cd3b3cf.0109241223.b2c233f_at_posting.google.com...
> > "Richard MacDonald" <macdonaldrj_at_att.net> wrote in message
> news:<TtYm7.18785$KV3.1543185_at_bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>...
> > > "Richard MacDonald" <macdonaldrj_at_att.net> wrote in message
> > > news:z5Xm7.18708$KV3.1532233_at_bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> > >
> > > I don't mind exposing myself. Its unavoidable.
> > > I'm just seeing something that doesn't fit
> > > your picture and I'm asking you to deal with it. I don't
> > > see you dealing with it.
> >
> > I don't need to deal with it because it does not exist. I suggest you
> > examine the definition of the Smalltalk language.
>
> I know Smalltalk more than a little well.
> And James Robertson (who knows a thing or
> two about Smalltalk :-) agreed with me that you
> were incorrect.
Big deal. Ask him to point to any Smalltalk language definition that defines
"instance" as anything other than a variable which one can reference.
> > Before you can claim to adhere to science, you must make an effort to
> > learn what has already been done. You have made no such effort. Your
> > claim that values are object instances in Smalltalk clearly
> > demonstrates that you do not even know the definition of the Smalltalk
> > language.
>
> The number 5.
> Its a value.
An instance or variable can have the value 5. The value, however, is not an instance.
> Its also an object instance.
According to the definition of the Smalltalk language an instance is a variable that one can reference. One cannot reference a value. Values are self-identifying.
> Why not simply argue your way out of the previous 3
> sentences?
They were untrue. Anyone with access to a browser and Google can verify for
themselves that Smalltalk defines "instance" as a variable that one can
reference.
As I said previously when you posted the above: What you call my high horse
is not at all flimsy. You expose much
>Oh I have lots of prejudices like we all do. I'm just exercising a
>particular set now since your high horse is flimsy and you
>deserve to be taken down a notch.
about yourself and your motives in the above statement. You expose,
for instance, that you have no interest in learning or in
communicating -- instead, you have an interest in attacking and
destroying. I find little merit in your goals.
Received on Sun Sep 30 2001 - 07:06:35 CEST